HUL drags Beco to Delhi HC over Surf Excel, Vim comparative ads

Hindustan Unilever has approached the Delhi High Court over a comparative advertising campaign run by D2C homecare brand Beco, which named Surf Excel and Vim in an ingredient-transparency push. The campaign links the products to chemicals it says are associated with skin irritation and allergic reactions.

The suit, filed against Beco's parent company Kwick Living, alleges commercial disparagement, trademark infringement and passing off.

The case came up before the Delhi High Court on August 19, where Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani asked Beco to respond to HUL's plea for an interim injunction against the campaign. The court did not restrain the ads immediately, saying it wanted to hear Beco's side first. The matter is set to be heard again on August 21, with Beco directed to file its reply by August 20.

Beco's two-film effort, titled #WarOnWhatsHidden and created by agency Colloquial, was rolled out through videos, social media posts, influencers and outdoor hoardings, directly comparing Beco's laundry and dishwashing liquids with Surf Excel and Vim.

The campaign targets Surf Excel over the presence of Benzisothiazolinone (BIT) and Linear Alkylbenzene Sulfonate (LAS), and Vim Dishwash over LAS.

Beco has said its findings come from independent testing by an NABL-accredited lab, which recorded BIT and LAS above 10% in the Surf Excel sample and LAS above 8% in the Vim sample. The brand has pointed to scientific and regulatory literature it says links these ingredients to potential skin, eye or allergic reactions, and notes its own laundry and dishwash lines are formulated without BIT or LAS.

Representing HUL, Senior Advocate Amit Sibal argued that Beco's testing established only the presence and concentration of the ingredients, not whether the finished products actually caused irritation or allergic reactions under normal use. He argued the prescribed safety test for such a claim exists but was not conducted, and that the possible effects of an ingredient in isolation cannot establish that a finished formulation causes the same effects.

HUL also objected to the campaign's use of its registered taglines, including Vim's "100 nimbuon ki shakti" and Surf Excel's "Daag Achhe Hain," to identify the targeted products, and alleged the ads mocked its consumers and implied the company was misleading them.

Separately, HUL flagged the timing of the launch, noting the campaign went live on the night of August 14, ahead of Beco's Independence Day sale and a public holiday that delayed HUL's ability to approach the court, by which point the campaign had already drawn millions of views and appeared on hoardings in several cities including Delhi.

Senior Advocate Chander M Lall, appearing for Beco, sought time to place the company's response and supporting material on record.

Beco co-founder Aditya Ruia had earlier framed the choice of Surf Excel and Vim as less about targeting HUL specifically and more about pushing ingredient transparency in homecare, a scrutiny he argued has lagged behind food and skincare. He cited the brand's selection of widely used products, multiple product batches tested, and campaign QR codes linking to underlying data as part of its due diligence, along with a stated review against ASCI and CCPA advertising guidelines.

Sebamed previously ran comparative ads against Dove, Lux and Pears over pH levels, a dispute that reached the Bombay High Court, while HUL's own Rin brand clashed with P&G's Tide Naturals over whitening claims back in 2010.